For leaders, there’s always lots of talk about teamwork. Organizations spend millions of dollars on team building to strengthen camaraderie and engagement among workers. Perspectives run the gamut between why teamwork is vitally important to how it’s overrated and often misapplied. But when you’re leading highly complex work that truly requires substantial interdependence, where bona fide collaboration is a make-or-break success requirement, what must a leader do to realize the highest level of teamwork? It doesn’t happen on its own. It happens when it’s designed that way.

I spoke with Caryn Davies, world-champion rower and three-time Olympic medalist, now an attorney. We spoke about how world-class rowing teams synchronize their efforts to achieve gold-medal results. For leaders who need their teams to all be rowing in the same direction, moving as an integrated machine to achieve results no individual could, Davies’s experience offers invaluable lessons. “I sometimes find the reference of ‘teamwork’ applied to the workplace a bit disingenuous,” she says. “True teamwork demands a level of bonding at deeper levels. That requires intentional effort to build. The intensity of the workplace, and its consumption of most of our brain power, leaves little reserve for building those bonds. When you’re executing a sport like rowing, even though physically demanding, you aren’t using all of your brain’s processing power, so there is reserve left to invest in relationships with your teammates.” There’s strong research that supports the notion that friendships at work not only improve team performance,but also job satisfaction. Leaders that intentionally focus on strengthening bonds among their teams reap great benefits from doing so.

In this two-part series, I’ll explore four insights Davies had to offer leaders trying to achieve the highest levels of collaboration. In this first part, we’ll focus on the importance of balancing individual and collective success among teams. Next week, we’ll look at how it is leaders strengthen vital connections with and among team members.

Moderate individuality; eliminate stardom. Says Davies, “In rowing, there is no stand out player. On sports teams where you have star players, you see divisiveness. Generally, you know who is faster on your team, but from the outside looking in, there is no star.” With work that demands a significant degree of interdependence, a level playing field is key. While you don’t want robotic clones devoid of personality, balancing how and when team members express individuality without overshadowing others is critical. As leaders, it’s important to pay attention to how you affirm team members’ contributions. Recognize that you are making an intentional tradeoff between emphasizing collective vs. individual success. While this doesn’t apply to all forms of work, when synchronization of efforts is key, sustaining equal standing matters. Davies says, “You see boats where there’s one person trying to win the race alone, and they burn out. The people behind them can’t follow and there’s a disconnect between them and the rest of the team, just making the boat go slower.”

Leaders should pay close attention to team members whose need to stand out overshadows their need to collaborate. In highly complex work where synergy is critical, those with excessive needs to distinguish themselves may not be a strong fit for the team. In one high-tech company, a team of engineers under tight deadlines struggled to integrate their test findings with their final solutions. A closer look revealed tensions among some of the senior engineers because one of them prided himself on being the team's star coder. The resentment among senior engineers, and the stress and distraction caused among lesser experienced engineers, derailed the team's quality and productivity. Once the self-aggrandizing engineer was removed, the team rediscovered its stride within a week.

Minimize internal competition; focus on real competitors. Even on the most collaborative teams, there is always some degree of competition. Even when it’s subtle, opportunities for advancement or plum assignments, or just a personal desire to stretch, can lead team members to view one another as competitors. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing until competitive behavior compromises the work. Davies says, “Rowing is one of the few sports where your teammates are also your competitors. You are all competing for a limited number of Olympic seats. But among us, it was a rule to ‘leave it on the water.’ That meant it was an act of respect to compete hard against your teammates while on the water to help make them better. But once you leave the water, you have each other’s backs.” Teams bond well around a common competitor that is external to the organization. Leaders must keep their teams riveted to the market competitors they are trying to beat to help minimize competition within the team. Davies recalls her coach’s tactic going into the 2008 Olympics. He gathered the whole team and said, “I’m going to put all of you in 2-person boats, and I’m going to race you against each other so often and so hard, that by the time you get to the Olympic starting line, you’re just going to look over and see Canada or Romania, and be so glad you aren’t racing your own teammates.”

Creating opportunities for team members to help sharpen one another’s capabilities is a great way to channel competitive energy for the ultimate goal – winning in the market. Focusing on external competitors as tools to sharpen your team’s capability helps keep team members centered and focused externally. One executive I worked with made sure his team had clear line of site to how their work directly contributed to competitive success. At each month’s review, they discussed competitor offerings, reviewed how his team’s results helped created competitive differentiation for the company, and set near-term targets for how to outperform head-to-head competitors.

Next week in our second part, we’ll explore Davies’ insights on how great teams have deep, vested interest in one another’s success, and how leaders deepen their connections to their teams in order to establish the trust needed to sustain that shared commitment.

I am cofounder and managing partner at Navalent, working with CEOs and executives pursuing transformational change for their organizations, leaders, and industries. I’ve got an endless passion for, and a 30-year track record, helping executives tackle challenges of strategy...